United States v. Aaron Thompson

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
• Decided: April 20, 2026
• Docket: 25-10225
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA11 Case: 25-10058 Document: 51-1 Date Filed: 04/20/2026 Page: 1 of 6

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-10058 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus

AARON B. THOMPSON, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 8:22-cr-00438-SDM-CPT-1 ____________________ ____________________ No. 25-10134 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, USCA11 Case: 25-10058 Document: 51-1 Date Filed: 04/20/2026 Page: 2 of 6

2 Opinion of the Court 25-10058

versus

AARON THOMPSON, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 8:22-cr-00438-SDM-CPT-1 ____________________ ____________________ No. 25-10176 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

AARON THOMPSON, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 8:22-cr-00438-SDM-CPT-1 ____________________ ____________________ No. 25-10225 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ USCA11 Case: 25-10058 Document: 51-1 Date Filed: 04/20/2026 Page: 3 of 6

25-10058 Opinion of the Court 3

AARON THOMPSON, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 8:22-cr-00438-SDM-CPT-1 ____________________

Before ROSENBAUM, JILL PRYOR, and GRANT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Aaron Thompson pleaded guilty to two counts of mailing threatening communications in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 876(c) and received a 41-month sentence. On appeal, Thompson challenges his sentence as substantively unreasonable. The government has moved to dismiss the appeal, arguing that: (1) the appeal is un- timely and (2) the sentence appeal waiver provision in Thompson’s plea agreement bars the appeal. We need not address whether the appeal is timely. Even assuming that Thompson’s appeal is timely, it is barred by the appeal waiver in the plea agreement. Thus, we dismiss his appeal. I. In 2022, Thompson, a Florida prisoner serving a 30-year sen- tence, mailed letters to judges on Florida’s Second District Court USCA11 Case: 25-10058 Document: 51-1 Date Filed: 04/20/2026 Page: 4 of 6

4 Opinion of the Court 25-10058

of Appeal threatening to kill them and their families. He was charged in federal court with three counts of mailing interstate threats in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 876(c). In a written plea agreement, Thompson agreed to plead guilty to two counts of mailing a threatening communication, and the government agreed to dismiss the third count. The plea agree- ment included a sentence appeal waiver provision. In this provi- sion, Thomas agreed to waive his right to appeal his sentence un- less his sentence (1) exceeded the guideline range determined by the court at sentencing, (2) exceeded the statutory maximum pen- alty, or (3) violated the Eighth Amendment. A magistrate judge conducted the change-of-plea hearing. He discussed with Thompson the appeal waiver provision. The magistrate judge explained that Thompson largely would be giving up his right to appeal his sentence and reviewed the exceptions when Thompson would be permitted to appeal. Thompson indi- cated that he understood that he was giving up the right to appeal unless one of the exceptions applied. At the end of the hearing, the magistrate judge found that Thompson was knowingly and volun- tarily pleading guilty. He recommended that the court accept Thompson’s plea and adjudicate him guilty. Thompson did not ob- ject to this recommendation. The court accepted Thompson’s plea and adjudicated him guilty. In October 2023, the district court im- posed a total sentence of 41 months’ imprisonment followed by three years of supervised release. It ordered the custodial sentence USCA11 Case: 25-10058 Document: 51-1 Date Filed: 04/20/2026 Page: 5 of 6

25-10058 Opinion of the Court 5

to run consecutively to the state sentence that Thompson was al- ready serving. In December 2024, Thompson, proceeding pro se, filed a no- tice of appeal. We then appointed counsel to represent him in this appeal. II. We review de novo the validity and scope of an appeal-waiver provision in a plea agreement. King v. United States, 41 F.4th 1363, 1366 (11th Cir. 2022). Sentence appeal waivers are enforceable if they are made “knowingly and voluntarily.” Id. at 1367. To enforce a sentence appeal waiver, the government must show that either (1) “the district court specifically questioned the defendant con- cerning the sentence appeal waiver during the” colloquy at the change-of-plea hearing, or (2) “it is manifestly clear from the record that the defendant otherwise understood the full significance of the waiver.” United States v. Bushert, 997 F.2d 1343, 1351 (11th Cir. 1993). “We have consistently enforced knowing and voluntary ap- peal waivers according to their terms.” United States v. Bascomb, 451 F.3d 1292, 1294 (11th Cir. 2006). The sentence appeal waiver provision in Thompson’s plea agreement bars the appeal. After reviewing the record, we con- clude that Thompson knowingly and voluntarily pleaded guilty and waived his right to appeal his sentence. Although the plea agreement’s sentence appeal waiver permits Thompson to appeal in several circumstances, none of those circumstances is present here. USCA11 Case: 25-10058 Document: 51-1 Date Filed: 04/20/2026 Page: 6 of 6

6 Opinion of the Court 25-10058

Thompson nevertheless asks us to allow him to appeal, ar- guing that sentence appeal waivers are “unconstitutional” and “un- enforceable” because it is improper to have a defendant, at the trial stage, waive his right to appeal his sentence. Appellant’s Br. 14. But the right to an appeal is statutory, not constitutional, and we have held that knowing and voluntary appeal waivers should be given their full effect. Bushert, 997 F.2d at 1347. The government’s motion to dismiss the appeal is GRANTED.